Category II Final Budget Reductions

[posted June 10, 2003]

Dear Colleagues,

Once again, I thank the many of you who sent me comments about the impact of the proposed Category II budget reductions required by the expected legislative reduction of our state appropriation. These are difficult issues, and as so many of your comments indicated, there is no solution to the dilemma imposed on us by the expected legislative action that does not affect a vital program of great significance and value to the university and its many constituencies. Nonetheless, the state will reduce our budget.

As you will notice, I made few changes in the final Category II reductions. These reductions apply in many cases to rather large units; some of the comments received from the faculty, staff, and students and those from many in our external constituencies will inform the process of implementing these necessary budget reductions within the units. As I review the implementation plans, I will have the suggestions you sent very much in mind.

The next step in this process is for each of the units affected by a budget reduction to prepare a budget plan implementing the reductions. The plans will make clear the impact of the reduction on the various services and activities involved. Plan proposals are due in the Budget Office for preliminary review by June 20, 2003. The Vice Chancellors will provide me with the completed budget plans on or before July 1, 2003. I will review these plans, for both Category I and Category II programs, as they arrive and approve them or ask for revisions as needed. The plans will allow us to phase down what we must, and manage the required layoffs and other significant impacts on people as carefully as possible. These plans will identify the resources needed to support the costs of reducing the budget over the next six to twelve months since the state funding will cease as of July 1, 2003. We will post a summary of these plans and their impact on the budget process soon after I approve the plans. An exception to this timetable may involve intercollegiate athletics, as I must consult with the trustee committee on Intercollegiate Athletics before deciding on the reductions that will take place in that unit.

This concludes the first phase of the budget reduction process and the table included with this memo summarizes what we have achieved so far in meeting the truly dramatic requirements of the proposed legislative budget. While the painful consideration that led to the reductions included here will cause significant damage to outstanding programs that support our many constituencies, the process is not yet complete. These reductions from Categories I and II reduce our budget by $15.8 million dollars. Our target estimate from the current legislative process is closer to at least $25 million. The next phase of this process involves two quite different issues. The first is a review of academic programs and the second is a consideration of increased student fees. Neither of these is a desirable alternative, but to fill the remaining gap, we must consider them. In subsequent communications I will describe our approach to these issues.

Clearly, this process has and will continue to test our university’s strength and resolve. Although many of us feel anger and frustration at the circumstances that force us to make truly unreasonable choices among exceptionally valuable activities, the people of UMass Amherst, on campus and off, have responded with a commitment to finding solutions to impossible challenges that testifies to the fundamental strength and the remarkable capacity of the institution.

My thanks to everyone for their commitment and engagement in this most difficult of processes,

John V. Lombardi
Chancellor

FY04 Budget Final Category II Reductions (PDF)




FY07 Budget Update Amherst 250 Plan: Step One, An Interim Report Amherst 250 Plan Financial Master Plan Budget Document Archive Home	Category II Final Budget Reductions [posted June 10, 2003] Dear Colleagues, Once again, I thank the many of you who sent me comments about the impact of the proposed Category II budget reductions required by the expected legislative reduction of our state appropriation. These are difficult issues, and as so many of your comments indicated, there is no solution to the dilemma imposed on us by the expected legislative action that does not affect a vital program of great significance and value to the university and its many constituencies. Nonetheless, the state will reduce our budget. As you will notice, I made few changes in the final Category II reductions. These reductions apply in many cases to rather large units; some of the comments received from the faculty, staff, and students and those from many in our external constituencies will inform the process of implementing these necessary budget reductions within the units. As I review the implementation plans, I will have the suggestions you sent very much in mind. The next step in this process is for each of the units affected by a budget reduction to prepare a budget plan implementing the reductions. The plans will make clear the impact of the reduction on the various services and activities involved. Plan proposals are due in the Budget Office for preliminary review by June 20, 2003. The Vice Chancellors will provide me with the completed budget plans on or before July 1, 2003. I will review these plans, for both Category I and Category II programs, as they arrive and approve them or ask for revisions as needed. The plans will allow us to phase down what we must, and manage the required layoffs and other significant impacts on people as carefully as possible. These plans will identify the resources needed to support the costs of reducing the budget over the next six to twelve months since the state funding will cease as of July 1, 2003. We will post a summary of these plans and their impact on the budget process soon after I approve the plans. An exception to this timetable may involve intercollegiate athletics, as I must consult with the trustee committee on Intercollegiate Athletics before deciding on the reductions that will take place in that unit. This concludes the first phase of the budget reduction process and the table included with this memo summarizes what we have achieved so far in meeting the truly dramatic requirements of the proposed legislative budget. While the painful consideration that led to the reductions included here will cause significant damage to outstanding programs that support our many constituencies, the process is not yet complete. These reductions from Categories I and II reduce our budget by $15.8 million dollars. Our target estimate from the current legislative process is closer to at least $25 million. The next phase of this process involves two quite different issues. The first is a review of academic programs and the second is a consideration of increased student fees. Neither of these is a desirable alternative, but to fill the remaining gap, we must consider them. In subsequent communications I will describe our approach to these issues. Clearly, this process has and will continue to test our university’s strength and resolve. Although many of us feel anger and frustration at the circumstances that force us to make truly unreasonable choices among exceptionally valuable activities, the people of UMass Amherst, on campus and off, have responded with a commitment to finding solutions to impossible challenges that testifies to the fundamental strength and the remarkable capacity of the institution. My thanks to everyone for their commitment and engagement in this most difficult of processes, John V. Lombardi Chancellor	FY04 Budget Final Category II Reductions (PDF)


© 2006 University of Massachusetts Amherst. Site Policies. This page is maintained by University Advancement Communications.